DOCSLIB.ORG

091019 Greenvillecenter Tisreviewletter.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
091019 Greenvillecenter Tisreviewletter.Pdf October 19, 2009 Mr. Todd J. Sammons Project Engineer DelDOT Division of Planning P.O. Box 778 Dover, DE 19903 RE: Agreement No. 1404 Traffic Impact Study Services Task No. 42A – Greenville Center Dear Mr. Sammons, McCormick Taylor has completed its review of the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) for the Greenville Center development (expansion) prepared by Apex Engineering, Inc. (Apex), dated May 22, 2009. This review was assigned as Task Number 42A. Apex prepared the report in a manner generally consistent with DelDOT’s Rules and Regulations for Subdivision Streets. The TIS evaluates the impacts of the proposed expansion of the Greenville Center development, located on the east side of Delaware Route 52 (Kennett Pike / New Castle Road 9) and the north side of Buck Road (New Castle Road 265), within Christiana Hundred in New Castle County, Delaware. The proposed expansion would add 22,235 square feet of retail space and 27 luxury condominium units, and would eliminate 4,064 square feet of office space. Including the existing development plus the proposed expansion, the completed Greenville Center would consist of 94,703 square feet of retail space, 58,805 square feet of office space, 3,451 square feet of medical office space, and 27 luxury condominium units on approximately 10.5 acres of land. There are two existing access points for the Greenville Center development; one on Delaware Route 52 and one on Buck Road. They will remain as the only access points. Construction is anticipated to be complete by 2012. The land is currently zoned as CR (Commercial Regional) in New Castle County. The developer does not propose to change the zoning. DelDOT currently does not have any relevant projects within the study area. However, since the development is located within the Brandywine Valley Scenic Byway area, DelDOT’s policy, as part of the strategies to manage the byway, is to avoid widening Delaware Route 52 and Montchanin Road (Delaware Route 100 / New Castle Road 225) if possible. Based on our review, we have the following comments and recommendations: The proposed development meets the New Castle County Level of Service (LOS) Standards as stated in Section 40.11.210 of the Unified Development Code (UDC). The stop-controlled minor street approach at the following intersection does not meet the DelDOT level of service criteria without the implementation of physical roadway and/or traffic control improvements. Existing Intersection Situations for which deficiencies occur Traffic Control 2008 Existing AM and PM; Delaware Route 52 and 2012 AM and PM without Greenville Center Greenville Crossing Shopping Unsignalized expansion; Center (North Egress) 2012 AM and PM with Greenville Center expansion The unsignalized T-intersection of Delaware Route 52 and Greenville Crossing Shopping Center (North Egress) exhibits LOS deficiencies under existing and future conditions. However, we do not recommend additional improvements be implemented by the developer at this intersection. While improvements could be made to improve traffic operations at this location, such as widening the median of Delaware Route 52 to allow left turns exiting the shopping center to be completed as a two-stage movement (with drivers stopping in the median if necessary), the impacts would be significant and a two-stage exit could potentially be less safe than the existing design. Additionally, the traffic volume exiting Greenville Crossing at this location would not increase due to the Greenville Center expansion, and motorists leaving Greenville Crossing also have the option of exiting via the south access, which is a signalized intersection across from Hillside Road (New Castle Road 264). Should the County choose to approve the proposed development, the following items should be incorporated into the site design and reflected on the record plan. All applicable agreements (i.e. letter agreements for off-site improvements and traffic signal agreements) should be executed prior to entrance plan approval for the proposed development. 1. The developer should improve the intersection of Buck Road and the Site Entrance. The proposed configuration is shown in the table below. Approach Current Configuration Proposed Configuration Southbound One 12’ left-turn lane and one One shared left/right-turn lane Site Entrance 12’ right-turn lane* Eastbound One left-turn lane and one One left-turn lane and one Buck Road through lane through lane Westbound One shared through/right-turn One through lane and one right- Buck Road lane turn lane * The northern leg of this intersection should also include a 15’ receiving lane for traffic entering the site, separated from southbound traffic leaving the site by a mountable median. These improvements must meet all DelDOT and AASHTO entrance design standards, including adequate radius of the entrance curblines for the appropriate design vehicle that would enter and exit the site. Based on evidence of tire scuff marks on curbs at this site entrance, the existing geometry is inadequate for vehicles entering and exiting this development. Greenville Center October 19, 2009 Page 2 Initial recommended minimum turn-lane lengths (excluding tapers) of the separate turn lanes are listed below. The developer should coordinate with DelDOT’s Subdivision Section to determine final turn-lane lengths. Approach Left-Turn Lane Right-Turn Lane Southbound 25 feet* 25 feet* Site Entrance Eastbound 185 feet** N/A Buck Road Westbound N/A 100 feet*** Buck Road * turn-lane length based on storage length per queuing analysis, with 25-foot minimum ** turn-lane length based on deceleration + storage length per DelDOT’s Standards and Regulations for Subdivision Streets and State Highway Access, but length is limited by the existing upstream left-turn lane along westbound Buck Road at the intersection of Delaware Route 52. These are back-to-back left-turn lanes and queuing analyses indicate that the current lengths should be maintained. *** turn-lane length based on deceleration + storage length per DelDOT’s Standards and Regulations for Subdivision Streets and State Highway Access 2. The developer should enter into a traffic signal agreement with DelDOT for the intersection of Buck Road and the Site Entrance. The agreement should include pedestrian signals, crosswalks and interconnection at DelDOT’s discretion, and the developer will be required to perform a signal warrant analysis for eight-hour volume (Warrant 1), four-hour volume (Warrant 2), peak hour volume (Warrant 3), pedestrian volume (Warrant 4), and crash experience (Warrant 7). 3. To the extent that it is legally permissible, physically feasible, and financially viable, the adjoining property owner reasonably cooperates, and there are no other constraints, the developer should make a good faith attempt to establish a cross access easement for a roadway connection between the Greenville Center development and the Greenville Crossing Shopping Center immediately to the north. At a minimum, the developer should identify a location on the Greenville Center property where this easement can be established and protected even if it is not possible to complete the connection under current conditions or constraints. 4. The following bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements should be included: a. A right-turn yield to bikes sign (MUTCD R4-4) should be added at the start of the right-turn lane added to Buck Road. b. Where the right-turn lane is added to Buck Road, a minimum of a five-foot bicycle lane should be dedicated and striped with appropriate markings for bicyclists through the turn lane in order to facilitate safe and unimpeded bicycle travel. c. Appropriate bicycle symbols, directional arrows, striping (including stop bars), and signing should be included along bicycle facilities and right-turn lanes within the project limits. Greenville Center October 19, 2009 Page 3 d. Utility covers should be moved outside of the designated bicycle lane or be flush with the pavement. e. Covered bike parking should be included near the entrances of all commercial establishments and office buildings to be included within this development. f. Sidewalks along the Delaware Route 52 and Buck Road site frontages should be upgraded as needed to ensure they are ADA compliant. g. Along Buck Road, the existing sidewalk should be extended down to the reconfigured site entrance. h. ADA compliant curb ramps and crosswalks should be provided at all pedestrian crossings, including all site entrances. Type 3 curb ramps are discouraged. i. Internal sidewalks for pedestrian safety and to promote walking as a viable transportation alternative should be constructed within the development. These internal sidewalks should connect the building entrances to the frontage sidewalks and to adjacent parcels where applicable. j. Where internal sidewalks are located alongside of parking spaces, a buffer should be added to eliminate vehicular overhang onto the sidewalk. k. The developer should install an ADA accessible 5’ x 3’ concrete pad at the existing bus stop along the Delaware Route 52 site frontage at the northern end of the site. The pad should have a maximum slope of 2% for water drainage. It should be connected to the existing frontage sidewalk and internal sidewalks. The Parking facilities for bicyclists should be included. The developer should coordinate with the Delaware Transit Corporation regarding the details and implementation of the transit-related improvements. Improvements in this TIS may be considered “significant” under DelDOT’s Work Zone Safety and Mobility Procedures and Guidelines. These guidelines are available on DelDOT’s website at http://www.deldot.gov/information/pubs_forms/manuals/de_mutcd/index.shtml. For any additional information regarding the work zone impact and mitigation procedures during construction please contact Mr. Adam Weiser of DelDOT’s Traffic Section. Mr. Weiser can be reached at (302) 659-4073 or by email at [email protected]. Greenville Center October 19, 2009 Page 4 Please note that this review generally focuses on capacity and level of service issues; additional safety and operational issues will be further addressed through DelDOT’s subdivision review process.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Delaware National TIS Review Letter
    September 25, 2017 Mr. Troy E. Brestel Project Engineer DelDOT Division of Planning P.O. Box 778 Dover, DE 19903 RE: Agreement No. 1773 Traffic Impact Study Services Task No. 1A Subtask 5A – Delaware National Dear Mr. Brestel: McCormick Taylor has completed its review of the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) for the Delaware National residential development prepared by Michael Maris Associates, Inc. (MMA) dated July 10, 2017. MMA prepared the report in a manner generally consistent with DelDOT’s Development Coordination Manual [formerly Standards and Regulations for Subdivision Streets , incorporated by reference into the New Castle County Unified Development Code 40.11.130]. The TIS evaluates the impacts of the Delaware National residential development, proposed to be located on the south side of Delaware Route 48 (Lancaster Pike / New Castle Road 237), on the east and west sides of Hercules Road (New Castle Road 282) and west of Centerville Road (New Castle Road 272) in New Castle County, Delaware. In total, the proposed development would consist of 158 single-family detached houses and 104 townhouses on approximately 205 acres of land. The Wilmington and Western Railroad runs north and south through the site, and the development would therefore be divided into three parts. The part west of Hercules Road would have 19 single-family detached houses; the part east of Hercules Road but west of the railroad would have 104 single-family detached houses; the part east of the railroad but west of Centerville Road would have 35 single-family detached houses and 104 townhouses. The following access points are proposed: two along Hercules Road (to serve all parts of the site west of the railroad) with additional access via interconnection to the Ashland Research Center and Norman Drive (to serve units east of Hercules Road and west of the railroad), one along Red Clay Drive (to serve the majority of the site east of the railroad), and one along Penn Oak Drive (to serve approximately 18 units).
    [Show full text]
  • Fuel Buses: a Case Study of the Delaware Authority For
    LIFE-CYCLE COST AND EMISSIONS ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVE- FUEL BUSES: A CASE STUDY OF THE DELAWARE AUTHORITY FOR REGIONAL TRANSIT (DART) by Amirhossein Shahpar A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the University of Delaware in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Civil Engineering Summer 2010 Copyright 2010 Amirhossein Shahpar All Rights Reserved LIFE-CYCLE COST AND EMISSIONS ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVE- FUEL BUSES: A CASE STUDY OF THE DELAWARE AUTHORITY FOR REGIONAL TRANSIT (DART) by Amirhossein Shahpar Approved: __________________________________________________________ Ardeshir Faghri, Ph.D. Professor in charge of thesis on behalf of the Advisory Committee Approved: __________________________________________________________ Harry Shenton III, Ph.D. Chair of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Approved: __________________________________________________________ Michael Chajes, Ph.D. Dean of the College of Engineering Approved: __________________________________________________________ Debra Hess Norris, M.S. Vice Provost for Graduate and Professional Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Ardeshir Faghri for his encouragement, patience, and guidance throughout the course of my graduate study. His comments and advice not only helped me to stay on track but also assisted me to get the most out of my time at the University of Delaware. I would like to thank Mr. Mark Glaze, Delaware Department of Transportation’s project manager and Mr. Brett Taylor, Delaware Department of Transportation’s financial and legislative policy advisor, for their comments and suggestions on my research work. I am thankful for Mr. Stephen Kingsberry, Executive Director of DART, for his patience and providing the necessary information for this study. His advice also was invaluable and helped me to make right assumptions whenever needed.
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 Inter-Regional Report Making Connections Across Our Region’S Borders
    2008 Inter-Regional Report Making Connections Across Our Region’s Borders 2 2008 Inter-Regional Report Prepared by the staff of the Wilmington Area Planning Council Adopted July 10, 2008 The preparation of this document was financed in part with funds provided by the Federal Government, including the Federal Transit Administration and the Federal Highway Administration of the United States Department of Transportation. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures Who is WILMAPCO? ····························································5 Figure 1: Population Growth by Percent Per Decade, 1990-2030 ....... 7 Executive Summary································································6 Figure 2: Inter-Regional Study Area by County .................................. 9 Introduction·············································································7 Figure 3: Counties in Study Area by Planning Organization............... 10 Section 1: Demographics························································11 Figure 4: Population Estimates by County, 2005................................. 11 Figure 5: Projected Population Change by County, 2000-2030........... 13 Section 2: Traffic & Travel····················································19 Figure 6: Population Change by TAZ, 2005-2030............................... 14 Section 3: Freight and Goods Movement·····························27 Figure 7: Employment Estimates by County, 2005 ............................. 15 Figure 8: Projected Employment Change by County, 2000-2030 ....... 17
    [Show full text]
  • Delaware's 2005 Submission Comments
    July 5, 2006 Office of Highway Policy Information Federal Highway Administration 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 Attention: HPPI-20, Room 3306 RE: Delaware HPMS 2005 Dear Sir/Madam: We are submitting herewith the 2005 HPMS Data in accordance with the reporting requirements. Area and Population The 2005 HPMS information reflects the 2000-Census Urban Boundaries. The Land area and Population are presented below: Location Area (Square Miles) 2005 Population Middletown, DE 3.5 6,605 Dover, DE 58.6 70,042 Georgetown, DE 3.6 8,221 Lewes, DE 17.3 17,695 Long Neck, DE 11.8 9,581 Milford, DE - Kent 5.5 5,564 Milford, DE - Sussex 6.3 8,369 Ocean View, DE 10.4 9,506 Philadelphia, PA--NJ--DE--MD 188.2 478,752 Salisbury, MD--DE 0.6 1,217 Seaford, DE 15.6 22,613 Smyrna, DE - Kent 6.0 15,221 Smyrna, DE - New Castle 1.1 70 Rural 1,625.50 190,067 Total Urban 328.50 653,457 Total Rural 1,625.50 190,067 Total State 1954 843,524 Chief, Highway Systems Performance Division July 5, 2006 Page 2 of 36 The Land Area was calculated in accordance with HPMS guidelines. This year’s calculations correctly match the 2000 Census measurements of Delaware’s total land area of 1954 square miles. Based on the 2000 Census data, the Delaware Population Consortium provided the following population data and forecasts by each county of the State. Area (Square County Population Miles) 2000 2003 2004 2005 Census New Castle 427 500,265 515,074 520,239 523,008 Kent 589 126,697 134,390 136,096 143,968 Sussex 938 156,638 168,027 172,085 176,548 Total State 1954 783,600 817,491 828,420 843,524 Source: DE Population Consortium, 2006 2005 Delaware Certification Public Mileage On June 15, 2006, Delaware reported 2005 Certified Public Mileage to the FHWA.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Name of Property 3. State/Federal Agency Certification Date State Or Federal Agency and Bureau
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 10024-0018 (Rev. 10-90) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES REGISTRATION FORM This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bull^ tmlj6AJ..M£ ark­ ing "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If any item does not apply to enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name Holladay-Harrington House other names/site number CRS #N-14151 2. Location street & number 3705 Kennett Pike not for publication n/a city or town Greenville vicinity state Delaware code DE county New Castle code 003 zip code 19807 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1986, as amended, I hereby certify that this _ nomination request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of His­ toric Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property JK meets _ does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant _ nationally _ statewide X locally. ( _ Se^) continuation shee,t fi^acjditional comments.) Signature of certifyin; Date State or Federal agency and bureau In my opinion, the property _ meets _ does not meet the National Register criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Title 17 Highways
    Title 17 Highways NOTICE: The Delaware Code appearing on this site is prepared by the Delaware Code Revisors and the editorial staff of LexisNexis in cooperation with the Division of Research of Legislative Council of the General Assembly, and is considered an official version of the State of Delaware statutory code. This version includes all acts effective as of September 20, 2019, up to and including 82 Del. Laws, c. 218. DISCLAIMER: With respect to the Delaware Code documents available from this site or server, neither the State of Delaware nor any of its employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately-owned rights. Please seek legal counsel for help on interpretation of individual statutes. Title 17 - Highways Chapter 1 General Provisions Subchapter I Definitions § 101 Definitions. (a) As used in this title, unless the context indicates a different intent: (1) “Construction” means the first complete building or rebuilding of a highway after it has been converted into a state highway upon a modern engineering design with a permanent foundation of cement, concrete or other equally hard and permanent material and a top dressing of suitable material to economically withstand the wear of the particular traffic to which such highway will probably be subject with an adequate drainage system so that such highway, with reasonable maintenance, can reasonably be expected to endure for upwards of 40 years.
    [Show full text]
  • K.3 Changes in State Member Banks
    K.3 ANNOUNCEMENT BY ' I \v 1970-No. 12 " , BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM | / Changes in State Member Banks For the week ended March 21, 1973 District Date Effective Mergers, Conversion, and Establishment of Branches 2 Bank of Passaic and Clifton, Passaic, New Jersey, 3-16-70 a State member bank, converted to Bank of Passaic and Clifton, National Association. 3 Community Bank and Trust Company, Paoli, Pennsylvania, 3-16-70 a State member bank, and Central-Penn National Bank,Bala- Cynwyd, Pennsylvania, merged under charter and title of latter bank. The former head office and branches of Community Bank and Trust Company will be operated as branches by the continuing bank. 7 The Armada State Bank, Armada, Michigan, a State member 3-19-70 bank, and First National Bank in Mount Clemens, Mount Clemens, Michigan, merged under charter and title of latter bank. A branch was established in the former location of The Armada State Bank. 1 Establishment of State Member Branches 2 Bankers Trust Company, New York, New York, established 3-21-70 a branch at West Side of Central Park Avenue, Town of Greenburgh, New York. 3 Wilmington Trust Company, Wilmington, Delaware,established 3-20-70 a branch at Kennett Pike, Delaware Route 52 and Buck Road, Christiana Hundred, Delaware. 4 The Firestone Bank, Akron, Ohio, established a branch at 3-17-70 1406-1412 Cleveland-Massilion Road, Copley Township, Ohio, to be known as Copley Branch. 7 The Waterloo Savings Bank, Vafccrloc, Iowa, established 3-9-70 a branch at 2430 Kimball Avenue, Waterloo, Iowa.
    [Show full text]
  • January 26, 2009 Michael Duross Deldot – Division
    January 26, 2009 Michael DuRoss DelDOT – Division of Planning P.O. Box 778 Dover DE 19903 RE: CRG Alliance – Stoltz Developments - Regional Model Scope Dear Mr. DuRoss: As a follow up to yesterdays meeting, I am providing you with our input on the scope of work for the regional traffic assessment. Since the original request to conduct this regional assessment came from the local community, we feel it is very important that this scope of work closely concentrate on that public concern. As part of Orth-Rodgers & Associates’ (ORA) role in this project, we have been meeting with representatives of the local civic groups and as a result, we have developed a clear understanding of their expectations. For your consideration we are submitting a proposed scope of work for the regional assessment that we feel would best match the needs of community. Attached for your use is a summary sheet that compares the ORA proposed scope of work to that of the previously presented scopes as prepared by Whitman, Requardt & Associates (WRA) and DelDOT. A detailed summary of our approach is listed below. Number of Sites – Four 1. Barley Mill Plaza 2. Shops at Brandywine Valley 3. Greenville Center 4. Montchanin Offices We understand that the Montchanin Office site is relatively small and its direct impact will not likely change the model’s results on a regional basis. However, the character of the roads and intersections in the immediate area of this site are of great concern to the community but no TIS work is being prepared for the site.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Davis Recent Work
    UC Davis Recent Work Title Blue Ball Properties – initiating responsible environmental stewardship Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8zr9k9r6 Authors McColl, Jayne E. Daly, Dorothy Publication Date 2003-08-24 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California BLUE BALL PROPERTIES – INITIATING RESPONSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP Jayne E. McColl (Phone: 215-592-4200, Email: [email protected]), PWS – McCormick Taylor & Associates, Inc., Two Commerce Center, Philadelphia, PA 19103, Fax: 215-574-3657 Dorothy Daly (Phone: 410-662-7400, Email: [email protected]), M.L.A, C.A – McCormick Taylor & Associates, Inc., Fax: 410-662-7401 Abstract: The Blue Ball Properties Area Transportation Improvement Project encompasses roadway and associated transit improvements surrounding the expansion of the AstraZeneca Headquarters at U.S. 202 (Concord Pike) and Delaware Route 141 near Wilmington, Delaware. Delaware secured 232 acres bordering the Zeneca site, known as the Blue Ball Properties and offered to provide land for the company’s expansion, as well as transportation, recreation, and other improvements that would benefit both AstraZeneca employees as well as the local community. Leaders from the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT), the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC), and the Delaware Economic Development Office (DEDO) became equal partners with the community in developing a master plan for the Blue Ball Properties. Project development included preparation of an environmental assessment (EA) document under NEPA, and identification of sensitive historic, cultural and natural resource areas. The project development process underwent a comprehensive minimization and avoidance evaluation to reduce impacts to natural and cultural resources on the project site and incorporated a proactive, environmental stewardship approach to mitigate for the impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Letter to Mr. Robert J. Touhey, Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC), from Mr. Peter E
    7 DU PQNT-NEWPORT ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD FILE INDEX OF DOCUMENTS I. SITE IDENTIFICATION 1. Letter to Mr. Robert J. Touhey, Delaware Department of Natural Resource d Environmentaan s l Control (DNREC), from Mr. Peter E. Kress, E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company, Inc., re: Response to December 10, 1979 requesradioactivitn ru o t y gamma scan d grossan s beta count monitorinn o s productiod an g n well water, 4/9/80. P. 100001-100002. Sample results fro EPA/DNREn a m C survey conducte n Februari d e attachedar y . 2. Memorandum to Mr. David Langford, U.S. EPA, from Mr. William M. Thomas, Jr., U.S. EPA, re: Newport pigments potential hazardous waste site radiological analytical results, 4/28/80 . 100003-100006P . A lette. r regarding the gross alpha and beta analyses samples and a sample location map are attached. 3. Stat f Delawaro e e Ground Water Withdrawal r Watefo s r Year 1979 for Du Pont-Newport, City of Newport and AWC-Wilmington Airport, 5/28/80 . 100007-100007P . 4. Letter to Ms. Ruthanne Gordon, U.S. EPA, from Mr. M. Barszcz [sic], E.I u Pon d .e Nemour d t Company& s , Inc., re: Newport former waste disposal operations, 7/22/80. P. 100008-100013 s attachedi A sitp . ema . 5. Report: Evaluation of Existing Conditions at the Newport Plan Nort- t h Disposal Sitr E.I u Ponfo ed , e d t Nemours & Company. Inc., prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 3/19/87 . 100014-100185P . Administrative Record File available 2/16/90, updated 12/31/91, 11/6/92, 11/13/92, 12/17/92, 1/11/93, 8/30/93, 8/21/95, 9/18/97, 3/16/98, 10/9/00 and 5/23/01.
    [Show full text]
  • General Disclaimer One Or More of the Following Statements May Affect
    General Disclaimer One or more of the Following Statements may affect this Document This document has been reproduced from the best copy furnished by the organizational source. It is being released in the interest of making available as much information as possible. This document may contain data, which exceeds the sheet parameters. It was furnished in this condition by the organizational source and is the best copy available. This document may contain tone-on-tone or color graphs, charts and/or pictures, which have been reproduced in black and white. This document is paginated as submitted by the original source. Portions of this document are not fully legible due to the historical nature of some of the material. However, it is the best reproduction available from the original submission. Produced by the NASA Center for Aerospace Information (CASI) f ' l "Made available under NASA sponsorship in the interest of early and wide dis- 1 semination of Earth Resources Surrey Program information and without Lability Uv/ ll for any use made the;eot." 1 111 -7 t^ POTENTIAL USEFULNESS OF CARETS DATA FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 6 'o By 1 L r+ N Peter J. Buzzanell U.S. Geological Survey s 0 a a FINAL REPORT—VOLUME 11 .e w z c .c or-) H CENTRAL ATLANTIC REGIONAL ECOLOGICAL TEST SITE H 04 .d .^ S 0 0 0 0 b P61 is a > (CARETS) PROJECT oc in •.q H r=• s as . o^ a a 3C 1r, o a+ W•eH4j H E•+ U = in O in W d E-H a+ w aC a s O in 0in W4 En • 04zinw>.
    [Show full text]
  • Existing Conditions Report
    Scenic Conservation Plan, Brandywine Valley National Scenic Byway Existing Conditions Report Delaware Greenways February 2011 0 SCENIC CONSERVATION PLAN, BRANDYWINE VALLEY NATIONAL SCENIC BYWAY EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT 1 SCENIC CONSERVATION PLAN, BRANDYWINE VALLEY NATIONAL SCENIC BYWAY EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background .................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 The Scenic Conservation Plan ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Previous Efforts............................................................................................................................................................ 2 1.4 The Planning Process ................................................................................................................................................. 3 1.5 Study Areas .................................................................................................................................................................... 5 2. Land Use ................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]